Grammar sixth form

[pantomimecow]

DS in Y10 at grammar school has been told that to be allowed to stay for sixth form they need

1. a minimum of B in 8 subjects at GCSE 2 English & Maths 3 A at GCSE in subjects they are taking to A level. (I think the criteria are more stringent for students transferring from another school)

Is that normal ?

My DCs go to an ordinary state school and the sixth form entry criteria is 5 GCSEs A*- C and a B in the subject you are taking to A level (or A in maths for further maths). I would have said the requirements are fairly similar in the other local school sixth forms. In practice most of the kids have much higher grades than the minimum or else they would struggle with A levels.

I teach in a comprehensive state school, most subects say you need a B grade at GCSE, some say you need an A; maths is an example that jumps to mind. We have a minimum average point score requirement as well.

A C grade at GCSE would not, in many cases, suggest that the student had the capacity to thrive with an AS/A2 course/

It sounds quite undemanding for a Grammar. I think that ours asks for at least 6 Grade A/A* at GCSE (and Eng/Maths, of course, and Grade A in your AS/A2 subjects).

Ours is the same as yours Senua.

At what point does it become acceptable for comprehensive schools to select +n the basis of ability? At entry selection is outlawed in comprehensive schools by the schools admission code but then - hey presto - onerous entry requirements to 6 form kicks in. At what year group age does it become ok to exclude children from the school based on ability?

HMM I'm not sure that 8 at minimum of B isn't more difficult than 6 at A.They only do 10 GCSEs (or 11 if they choose to do one after school) so DS for example who is atrocuious at English can't afford to get a C at anything else.
And I wonder how it will be affected when kids have to be in education till they are 18 ?

DS was at a state grammar and iirc (it's over 5 years ago) the requirements were similar to the OP's DS.
DD went to a very high-achieving 6th form college which interviewed all prospective students & selects mainly on their attitude & commitment - but they do sometimes ask pupils to review their chosen A level subjects in the light of their GCSE Grades.

There is little point in taking students into the sixth firm to do A levels if they don't have the ability to pass them - there are other qualifications available at post GCSE level - presumably these will become more common once the school leaving age rises.

It is not that the DC can't benefit from taking A levels it is because they are less likely to get A and the new Astar grades.

If it is right for the admissions code to prescribe what schools can do for Year 7 admissions why is it silent on 6 form admissions. Any ideas?

"At what point does it become acceptable for comprehensive schools to select on the basis of ability?"

ATM, education is only compulsory until Y11. Education is not compulsory for sixth form: the kids don't have to go and, conversely, the schools don't have to accept them. Simples.
As and A2 are very different to GCSE, it's not more-of-the-same-but-a-little-bit-harder, so it's only to be expected that schools will wish to have those students who might succeed. And it's only fair on the students to warn them that they might be about to waste a year of their life doing the wrong course.
Are you going to suggest comprehensive Universities next?

"I'm not sure that 8 at minimum of B isn't more difficult than 6 at A."

The 6 at A/A* Grade is just the minimum to get you on the interview list, it is not an automatic entry. Most get way above this. It's the equivalent to thinking that AAA at Level will get you into Oxbridge: it won't, it is merely the first rung on the ladder.

I was talking about internal students though which the school tries to accommodate first before it selects 'the best of the rest' which will likely have to achieve much higher than the internal students.

senua - you haven't convinced me - if you can select for university, and for 6 form (schools don't only have to teach A levels) why not in Year 9 pre GCSE (some schools might choose the more academic GCSEs); why not Year 7?

We allow the vast majority of our students to stay on at VI form as we are a comprehensive but certain As courses have higher requirements because of the nature of the course.

I have a lad in my tutor group who is probably going to get a mixture of Es and Fs at GCSE. It would be ridiculous for him to stay on and do AS maths, physics and Philosophy. We can help him find something more suitable probably combined with a work placement.

Sorry, Zanzibar, I'm not going to get drawn into a Selective v Comprehensive row.

Of course they should be selective in who can do A levels. A levels are simply not a qualification intended for a comprehensive intake - never were*, never should be. If you haven't proved your academic ability at GCSE then you'd almost certainly be better off doing a more vocational type course.

*they were originally designed be taken only by those pupils who'd got into grammar schools in the first place who'd then got sufficiently good grades in their O-levels. Assuming the standards haven't dropped atrociously, theres still only going to be a certain percentage of the population who are able to benefit from them.